1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ryan Tannehill

Discussion in 'Other NFL' started by bbqpitlover, Oct 16, 2019.

Ryan Tannehill is...

  1. A terrible QB

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. A below average QB

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  3. An average QB

    7 vote(s)
    10.0%
  4. An above average QB

    39 vote(s)
    55.7%
  5. An elite QB

    16 vote(s)
    22.9%
  6. The GOAT.

    4 vote(s)
    5.7%
  1. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    And again

    You are setting the bar so ridiculously low here.

    It is easier to pass against a stacked box

    Again that is akin to saying water is wetter than sand
     
  2. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Many factors.
     
  3. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    What is the correlation between Prescott and Elliott's performance? Is it strong or weak?
     
  4. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    It is shocking how little he understands about the game.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Such as? And you know this definitively?
     
  6. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And that's the point.
     
  7. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Already answered (personnel, down and distance, score, etc) and yes.
     
  8. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    Please illustrate that for us if you would then. Break down why the Titans performed so much better in the passing game against stacked than non-stacked boxes, or simply point to the number of the post where you already did that if you would.
     
  9. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Is it?
     
  10. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    It's my point, yes.
     
  11. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Why do you think number in the box was the determining factor? How are you sure that it wasn't something else? You haven't considered any other factors.
     
    resnor likes this.
  12. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    It is also too simplistic to be meaningful.
     
    resnor likes this.
  13. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    When does a simple explanation ever have merit your world? Never?
     
  14. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    And you have? Where are they and what is the evidence of them?
     
  15. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Not in football. Not when you are forced to cherry pick data to make your point. Not when you need to ignore facts to make your point.
     
    resnor likes this.
  16. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Which one of us has been trying for years to discredit Tannehill using a pre-school understanding of football?
     
    resnor likes this.
  17. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    So then make the counterpoint. Why did the Titans pass the ball so much better against stacked than non-stacked boxes?

    Flesh it out for us, with all its complexity.
     
  18. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I have no interest in making a counter point that you'll simply ignore. You've already showed a strong tendency to ignore facts.

    I prefer to focus on how well the QB did his job and Tannehill excelled at all measures including red zone efficiency, completion % above expected, YPA, and passer rating in all kinds of situations.
     
    resnor likes this.
  19. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    No, not in all kinds of situations.

    1) Against non-stacked boxes he performed considerably worse.

    2) In high-volume games he performed considerably worse.

    3) The trend was that when Derrick Henry performed more poorly, so did Tannehill.

    4) He was worst in the league in deep throw accuracy, but his receivers remarkably caught every catchable pass of that type.

    So basically when the effect of Derrick Henry was eliminated, Tannehill's performance plummeted, and he enjoyed either the remarkable skill of his receivers with regard to catching downfield passes, or remarkable luck in that area.
     
  20. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It's also been the story of Tannehill for years. Tannehill has largely always done his job, and been let down by coaches and players who were terrible at doing their job. Tennessee had players and coaches doing their job, and Tannehill was wildly successful.
     
    Hiruma78 and xphinfanx like this.
  21. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Let me try to show you the degree of complexity that you ignore in your pre-school analysis. Here is an article studying how effectively teams ran the ball against stacked or neutral boxes.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-nfl-was-weird-last-season/

    A few points:
    1. The study only considered 1st and 10 when the game was still in doubt. Why? Because down and distance and score CHANGES things. Just like I said.
    2. Only two teams passed more often than rushed in this situation.
    3. The Titans run/pass split and rushing effectiveness were average in this situation.
    4. The Titans were far more effective passing in this situation than nearly every other team.
    5. Only four teams were less effective passing than rushing in this situation.

    Here is another article that shows number of men in the box and offensive personnel are related. JUST LIKE I SAID.

    https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2019/offensive-personnel-men-box

    Offensive personnel impacts MIB because the defense reacts to what the offense shows, stacking the box or backing off.
     
    resnor likes this.
  22. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Derrick Henry missed one game. Tannehill has a passer rating of 133.6 in that game.......
     
    resnor and xphinfanx like this.
  23. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Article discussing the Titans 2 TE sets.

    https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/patriots/titans-have-tight-end-combinations-stress-patriots-defense

    And Tannehill uses those weapons incredibly efficiently. Since seeing playing time in Week 6, Tannehill is first in the NFL in yards per attempt (9.6), second in completion percentage (70.3) and third in rating (117.5). A great deal of that success has come when throwing to Brown, who has been sensational as a rookie, but Tennessee's 12-personnel package — one back, two tight ends — has also been the source of great production.

    Only a handful of teams use more "12," and since Week 6, the Titans average 11.7 yards per attempt out of that grouping. They're also a real threat to rip off chunk plays in the running game out of those looks with a 5.1 yards per carry average.​

    Think about that. 11.7 YPA and 5.1 YPC out of the same formation. Why wouldn't you use that formation?
     
    resnor likes this.
  24. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    resnor and xphinfanx like this.
  25. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Hey look, that bum Aaron Rodgers was more effective in larger personnel groups than obvious passing formations:

    https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/...sonnel-matt-lafleur-aaron-rodgers-2019-week-3

    According to Sharp Football Stats, the Packers’ passer rating from 12 personnel (1 RB, 2 TEs, 2 WRs) is 112.1, with a 10 yards per attempt average on 23 dropbacks. Rodgers is even better from 21 personnel (2 RBs, 1 TE, 2 WRs) with a 114.9 passer rating in 14 dropbacks. Meanwhile, from 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WRs), they’re one of the worst offenses in football run or pass, with a rating of 83.3 when Rodgers slings it.
     
    resnor and Cashvillesent like this.
  26. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
  27. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    His ecievers arent even talented. Davis is a failure of a WR. Hes much more valuable as a blocker (wich is sad), but the only talented offensive player is Brown on this team. Jonnu Smith has potenial but he is a 4th rder still learning the ropes of this league. Humphries was probably the worst Jon Robinson signing as a GM to this day. He has only played a limited hand of snaps before he was injured last year.
     
  28. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
  29. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Regards the stacked line against the Ravens in the playoffs.
    On the 1st play of the 2nd quarter the Titans had opened up a 14-0 lead. Maybe that had a lot to do with the Titans feeding Henry the ball a lot, and the Ravens knowing this was coming moving to 8 man boxes, and Titans continuing to feed him when the Ravens couldn't stop him with 8 man boxes.
     
  30. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    WHAT????? Score and game situation affecting play calling???? Never! It must only be about the QB.
     
    Cashvillesent likes this.
  31. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Up to the point the Titans went up 14-0 they had run 14 plays. 7 rushes for Henry and 6 passes for Tannehill, plus a rush for a 1st down by Tannehill. That’s nearly half of Tannehill’s attempts for the game essentially in the first quarter.

    What looking at the sequence of the game rather than the box score tells you is that the Titans ran out the clock after Tannehill won the game for them in the first quarter and 1 play of the 2nd (the Ravens scored 12 points total for the game). It’s the reverse of the causation being argued by theguy. i.e. Henry got force fed the ball because Tannehill was good, not the ball was taken away from Tannehill because Henry was good.
     
    resnor likes this.
  32. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Exactly. It's sad that you've had to finally break it down, when everyone has been saying Look, Henry was a more effective and productive runner with Tannehill than without.

    Bet your post will not be listened to.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2020
    FinFaninBuffalo likes this.
  33. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    I was joking..... I agree, totally.
     
    Irishman and resnor like this.
  34. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Nobody has ever argued that here Guy

    You are using a nothing argument to try to discredit tannehill. Stating something like... "Gravity affects all things on earth" And then you say... Because of Gravity Tannehill is not that good. But all QB's are affected by gravity.

    All QB's benefit from having a legitimate running game... All of them... This is not a phenomenon where Tannehill somehow magically benefits more than others and somehow looked good last year because of only that.
     
    Irishman, resnor and FinFaninBuffalo like this.
  35. FinFaninBuffalo

    FinFaninBuffalo Well-Known Member

    2,474
    2,954
    113
    Dec 13, 2007
    Expect some cherry picked stat to be coming your way. Or, a search for one QB that bucks the trend.......
     
    Irishman likes this.
  36. Etrius24

    Etrius24 Well-Known Member

    682
    685
    93
    Mar 4, 2020
    Finfanin Buffalo

    Yeah I love Aaron Rodgers... He is one of the best QB's I have ever watched... But last season he had better running backs than Tannehill. Green Bay had two fantastic Backs that flat out balled. Catching passes and running the ball They got over 1500 yards total out of Jones and more than 750 yards total out of Williams.

    I would love to see him try to argue that Rodgers was overrated because teams had to account for the talented running backs on the Packers. LMAO
     
  37. Cashvillesent

    Cashvillesent A female Tannehill fan

    770
    641
    93
    Dec 8, 2019
    To be honest, id rather have Tannehill last year than Rodgers.

    Rodgers didnt not impress me at all, and Im a huge fan.
     
    Irishman likes this.
  38. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    As I've pointed out to you repeatedly, there is variation in the association between the performance of a team's run game and the performance of its quarterback. In other words, all quarterbacks do not benefit to the same degree from their running games.

    There are quarterbacks whose performances are more strongly related to the performance of their run games, and there are quarterbacks whose performances are more independent of their run games. The 0.65 correlation between Tannehill's passer rating and Henry's yards per rush on a game-by-game basis in 2019 indicates a fairly strong relationship in that regard. Again contrast that with the figure of -0.22 for Russell Wilson and the Seahawks' run game in 2019.

    And it is a phenomenon where Tannehill benefited (although not "magically" as you facetiously noted) from his run game. The 0.65 correlation noted above, combined with 1) the percentage of stacked boxes the Titans faced primarily as a function of Henry's performance, and 2) Henry's almost superhuman performance against those stacked boxes, is a testament to that.
     
  39. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    That's precisely the opposite of what I'd argue, given that I suspect the correlation between Rodgers's performance and the performance of his running game is far weaker than 0.65.

    Again, quarterbacks vary in the degree to which their performance is associated with that of their run game. I suspect Rodgers's performance historically is highly independent of that of his run game.
     
  40. The Guy

    The Guy Well-Known Member

    6,598
    3,323
    113
    Oct 1, 2018
    This is all good information and I respect your efforts to obtain it.

    What it suggests to me is that there are indeed additional factors to consider regarding the stacked boxes the Titans faced in 2019, although I don't think it explains the decrement in Tannehill's performance from top of the league versus stacked boxes, to middle of the road versus non-stacked boxes.

    Again I think we'll know far more definitively about what's going on here when there is an additional season of data to consider. When there is variation in these factors in 2020, the performances on the basis of that variation will tell us plenty.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2020

Share This Page